Melbourne University student Jasmine Pilbrow, peacefully protesting against the deportation of an Eezham Tamil by refusing to sit down in a Qantas plane in February 2015, was criminalised by an Australian court on Friday. The 22-year-old girl was found guilty by Australia prosecuting the case as interference with a crewmember of an aircraft. When Pilbrow defended that she acted as the safety of another person’s life was at stake, the court dismissed it as her personal belief. But questions go unanswered that why the Australian federal police decided to cancel the deportation of the Tamil youth that day, if there was no substance in the protest, and why Pilbrow was neither arrested nor prosecuted at that time. She was charged one year later, in February this year.
Jasmine Pilbrow outside court [Photo courtesy: The Age]
Pilbrow referred to a provision of the criminal code, which states a person is not criminally responsible for an offence if it was carried out “in response to circumstances of sudden or extraordinary emergency,” The Guardian said.
“My actions were reasonable and it was effective because my peaceful stance resulted in this man being taken off the plane,” Pilbrow was further cited.
However, the magistrate, who didn’t accept Pilbrow’s defence said, because a person had strong personal beliefs it did not mean they weren’t criminally liable for an offence.
Australian government strongly believes in accommodating genocide-accused Sinhala military commanders as diplomats for its ‘foreign relations’.
Australia’s foreign policy beliefs, finances and international articulation buttress the State in Colombo and end up in making Australia liable of contributing to genocide and structural genocide of the nation of Eezham Tamils. Australia’s stand is also a major impediment for the nation of Eezham Tamils getting its national-question-based political solutions.
Australian government’s actions in the bandwagon of the USA are indirectly responsible for asylum seekers coming into Australia. The British government made a similar mistake in Europe and the English voters have taught the democratic lesson of the century.
Australian Executive timing the prosecution comes from its beliefs and is different from judicial dispensation.
Australia’s judicial show might have been timed for twisting and detracting any public protest as ‘individual faith-based’, while on the other hand a global war is engineered by the bandwagon by kindling ‘faith’ passions. Or the show might have been timed for intimidating any local protest, especially in the case of Eezham Tamils, as another round of deception is hatching in Geneva. The Australian government also must be confident that the global Tamils, especially the Australian Tamils, are now defunct or have been successfully hijacked.
The same Australia was strongly protesting drug-accused executions in Indonesia a couple of months back.
If Australia’s dream is to succeed the British legacy in the Indian Ocean, and for that sake it wants to ride on the genocidal State in Colombo, and wants to check the South Asian subcontinent, it is making a historical blunder for itself by continuously and nakedly articulating against the aspirations of Tamils, who have a wide presence in the region, even though stateless.
